(adapted from the The Oceanic Circle, Tokyo: United Nations University Press, 1998).

　once the political structures and the organisational aspects of the Authority is [sic] in place we must look beyond housekeeping matters, such as the allocation of seats and the size of the budget, to the implementation of the object and purpose of the Authority. Simply put, the object is to provide a machinery for the administration of the resources of the deep seabed which is the common heritage of mankind and the purpose is to encourage the orderly development of those resources so that the international community as a whole may benefit from them.

　

　The next step in the development of the Authority must be to reach out and involve all those who are likely to undertake research and development activities in the deep seabed including those who are otherwise associated with those activities such as in the design manufacture and sale of marine technology. It is through interaction with them that we can develop a system that would be mutually beneficial. Special attention must be given to those who were registered as pioneer investors by the Preparatory Commission.

　

　

　Taking into account the tremendous changes which have taken place and the lessons learned, it would seem that, at present, the very objective of the Authority is somewhat nebulous. No one really knows if and when nodule mining is to begin. No one really knows what the Authority is to do during the indefinite period in which no nodule mining will take place.

　

　To adjust and reconceptualize the Authority, and to make it useful to the international community, three steps might be undertaken when the Assembly meets in 1997.

　

　First of all, a meaningful plan of work for the remaining years of this century should be prepared for the next session. Within the present framework, and in line with the present activities of States, this plan should concentrate of the development of human resources, on technology cooperation, and on studying long-term environmental impacts and the enhancement of biodiversity.

　

　The Pioneer Investors' training programmes should be resumed and developed. They should be integrated into the other training activities within the UN system and outside of it.78 The Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea (DOALOS), in cooperation with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the International Ocean Institute are developing a series of programmes applying very advanced educational methodologies called “Train-Sea-Coast.” The Sea-Bed Authority might join this undertaking to develop a curriculum for sea-bed mineral exploration and management, including hydro-carbons in the economic zone and in the international area.

　

　Several States are engaged in technology testing and upgrading and in studying the environmental impact of these technologies. The Authority should take initiatives to associate itself with these activities. A cooperative venture in technology development, in conjunction with a four or five-year environmental impact study, in association with the Authority and linked to a training programme, might form the backbone of the Authority's work plan for the next few years79 and prepare the ground for the more sweeping, long-term changes proposed in the final section of this paper.

　

　Secondly, when the housekeeping matters are left behind, ample time should be reserved for a general debate on the future of the Authority. This might be an essential contribution to a new vision of the Authority, to bring it into line with more recent developments such as the climate and biodiversity conventions to which deep sea-bed research could make important contributions. The Delegations should also to have the opportunity, during special hearings, to hear from the groups mentioned by Mr. Nandan in his acceptance speech as quoted above. To those he mentioned one might also add some NGOs, especially those with competence on the environmental impact of sea-bed mining and on the interactions of the Authority's sea-bed mining regime and the regime established by the Biodiversity Convention.

　

　This debate and these hearings should take place in 1997, enabling Delegations to take decisions when innovative changes may have to be made in 1998.

　

　The third step that might be taken is for one or more Delegations to take the initiative provided for in Article 162.2.(o)(ii) with regard to rules and regulations for the exploration and production of resources other than manganese nodules -- after establishing whether, under the implementation agreement, such a request can be made. If the answer to this question were to be negative, the revision of paragraph 15 of the Annex to the Implementation Agreement becomes a matter of urgency -- unless the Authority wants to permit that it be ruled out of the real utilization of the Area and its resources which are the Common Heritage of Mankind.

　

　The rest of this section will take the form of a revised Part XI for the next century, together with a set of explanatory notes.